http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=1050106


in reply to Re^3: Is auto-dereferencing worth forcing upgrades to newer versions of Perl?
in thread Is auto-dereferencing worth forcing upgrades to newer versions of Perl?

Not in core, it doesn't. (Though I wish it did.)

Wish granted.

Really, it does:

#! perl -slw use strict; package Thing; sub new { bless [], $_[0] }; sub push { push @{ shift() }, @_ } package main; use Data::Dump qw[ pp ]; my %x = ( foo => [ map Thing->new, 1 .. 10 ] ); $x{foo}[0]->push( 1,2,3 ); pp \%x; __END__ C:\test>junk66 { foo => [ bless([1, 2, 3], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), bless([], "Thing"), ], }

That's 5.10, but it's worked right back to 5.6.1 (and probably before, but that's before my time with Perl.)

(And if aesthetics is the current, important criteria for the future of Perl5, there are plenty of other areas that definitely rate attention long before this.)


With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.